|
Nvideas rsx pipelines vs 360 ATI pipelines 360 core vs ps3 cell
|
|
|
fazyninja
Suspended permanently
|
29. January 2006 @ 14:32 |
Link to this message
|
|
lol
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
29. January 2006 @ 18:54 |
Link to this message
|
|
no, you probably clicked send, then it didnt load so you clicked send again. then probably a third time, or you refreshed and sent again.
But they all do sort of the same thing, and that is rearrange what you thought was real, and they remind you of the beauty of very simple things. You forget, because youre so busy going from a to z, that theres 24 letters in between... You turn on... tune in... and you drop out...
PS3 Username: Anubis66
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 29. January 2006 @ 18:54
|
|
KoOkOo67
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
30. January 2006 @ 02:29 |
Link to this message
|
|
No anibus, afterdawn had technical difficulties yesterday.
>_<
|
|
TruthMan
Member
|
30. January 2006 @ 05:28 |
Link to this message
|
o, well i haven't got far cry but i have played it.
besides, its better for the PC, i have played the PC version also.
my opinion thou.
far cry is the first decent game that is not listed then, but im sure it will be, it wouldnt be a good move if they missed games like that out.
and kookoo, my fps thing.
i have benchmarked that many times and ran so many framerate tests, that i can roughly estimate how many fps a game is running at.
due to overclocking etc, and to see if it has made any difference, as accurately as possible, i tweak all the time.
no way would i just guess if i didnt know, if* i didnt know i would just say, (like you said) that they play better and faster.
but like with all games, even on the very best of the best, games can have slowdown moments, just small quick *farts* where it jerks, or the framerate goes bad for half a second etc.
but there usually very rare in the 360 playing old xbox games case.
and the improved resolution is also nice.
Don't judge the consoles by specs, more isnt always better, espec in PS3 specs.i know the truth, ask if u wanna know.......
Do not compete without valid correct technicality on your terms of the argument.
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
30. January 2006 @ 20:46 |
Link to this message
|
But they all do sort of the same thing, and that is rearrange what you thought was real, and they remind you of the beauty of very simple things. You forget, because youre so busy going from a to z, that theres 24 letters in between... You turn on... tune in... and you drop out...
PS3 Username: Anubis66
|
|
matt5112
Junior Member
|
30. January 2006 @ 20:50 |
Link to this message
|
|
www.ps3updates.com all that was already mention on that site. if your interested in PS3 check it out often. they have a PSP, iPod, PS2, XBOX 360, Nintendo Revolution, GP2X sites as well.
Giga-byte K8NXP-SLI
A64 3000 OC 1.8 to 1.98 ghz
2x512meg Dual Channel
MSI 6800 GT OC to 420 mhz, 1.10 ghz
Creative X-FI Extreme Music
Creative Inspire T7700 7.1
PSP 2.0 (For GTA:LCS)
|
AfterDawn Addict
|
30. January 2006 @ 20:56 |
Link to this message
|
|
just posting them from sites people would see as not so bias and try to use that against me. plus some people dont look for this stuff.
But they all do sort of the same thing, and that is rearrange what you thought was real, and they remind you of the beauty of very simple things. You forget, because youre so busy going from a to z, that theres 24 letters in between... You turn on... tune in... and you drop out...
PS3 Username: Anubis66
|
|
KoOkOo67
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
13. February 2006 @ 15:27 |
Link to this message
|
|
I can't wait till feb 16 and march 1'st. This thread can finally get going again.
>_<
|
|
rabbity
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
15. February 2006 @ 11:14 |
Link to this message
|
|
this thread will hit sky high when e3 comes to town.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 15. February 2006 @ 11:14
|
|
ultra_00
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
2. April 2006 @ 18:23 |
Link to this message
|
If only you knew what you were talking about. I didn't know a g70 graphics processor was better than a videocard that goes beyond many shader model 3.0 requirements and even has some advanced features not even listed in windows graphics foundation 2.0 (WGF2.0) for the unreleased windows vista.
http://www.beyond3d.com/articles/xenos/index.php?p=10
http://www.beyond3d.com/articles/xenos/index.php?p=09
Unified shader... 48 pipelines.... 512MB (ps3 has 256MB) of video memory, 10mb edram 4xaa antialiasing at no performance drop is what the 360 gpu is packing... Oh a 7800gtx (g70) is better than ati's unreleased r600???? What exactly are you thinking? The 360 will massacre the ps3 when it comes to graphics..
Before you go thinking the extra 512MB of video memory makes no difference just check out these benchmarks pay attention to game benches such as fear, cod 2, doom 3. The videocard you need to pay attention to is the GeForce 7800 GTX 256 MB (ps3 gpu)
http://www.gamepc.com/labs/print_content.asp?id=h2k5512&cookie%5F...
Notice the 512MB versions always outperform the 256 versions?, but wait the max resolution they used was 1600x1200 isn't this ps3 gpu suppose to get the job done at 1080p? (1920x1080) which will put more stress on the graphics card.
For the record incase anyone was wondering the 360 graphics card is more advanced and can outperform every videocard shown there.
In true games next gen games the extra 256 ALWAYS makes a difference the ps3 is already losing in the graphics technology department and the only area in which they could've helped themselves a bit they didn't still stuck with 256MB of video memory that will limit the ps3's abilities to handle the more stressful games and not wanting to show such weaknesses developers will in fact leave out certain features or graphical bells and whistles to keep it running nicely.
Maybe a non unified shader 7800gtx in the ps3 can beat nvidia's unreleased g80 product which will be the FIRST time nvidia (ones that made ps3 video card) will be using the newer technology for their videocards (technology i'm referring to is unified shaders)
I'd like to see your detailed explanation of how exactly an older videocard the 7800gtx is going to outperform nvidia's unreleased product line.. by now if you actually read any of this you'll know its impossible which is exactly why the 360 gpu which has technology that wont be seen on the pc till ati's r600 product line.. The 360 gpu is even better than the unreleased r580 from ati. You are aware there are already pc videocards that surpass the 7800gtx the ps3 will be using? Whereas there is nothing currently for the pc that can by itself beat the 360 gpu not for a good while to come. A simple reason is for one not a single videocard avaiable to the pc right now has a unified shader architecture or has 48 pipelines. Nothing has that 10mb of edram either. 10MB of edram no big deal what the hell makes that such a big deal for the 360? Find out this next link is by far the easiest to understand breakdown of why the 360 graphics card is far more impressive than most people truly know. In a year or 2 the 360's true graphics capabilities will start to show.
http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=Nzcx
|
|
vzero
Junior Member
|
2. April 2006 @ 22:54 |
Link to this message
|
ATi's unreleased R580? What are you, back in time? It was released months ago, is called the x1900 series, and is as fast as both the PS3 and Xbox 360 graphics processors, it is quite similar to the latter...
Both systems have 512mb memory overall. nVidia splits this in two, with 256mb for graphics and 256mb for main system memory. Xbox 360 has 512mb of shared memory... So both the system (CPU etc...) and the GPU will use it, so your supposed advantage there disappears.
There are no plain advantages of the Unified shader technology yet, it is really a design to make things simpler for graphics designers... Also you should know that the Xenos in Xbox 360 is ATi's R500 GPU, renamed, repackaged and used well... since both Xenos and x1900 can use a max of 48 pixel shaders at once, but x1900 can also do 8 vertex runs at the same time, whilst Xenos can do none, we can see that the x1900 has superior peak performance...
The edram is very nice, you're right, but it can't save it.
Just so you know, G80 probably wont have a unified architechture... just sm4 support. (Xenos GPU has SM3..).
Lastly, to get an idea of PS3s power please read this: http://games.kikizo.com/news/200602/065_p1.asp
And if you look at my older posts on this thread you will realise I am not a fanboy. I have a an xbox 360, and I love it.
|
|
zelda64
Senior Member
|
2. April 2006 @ 23:09 |
Link to this message
|
|
Well said.
|
|
oofRome
Senior Member
|
3. April 2006 @ 15:48 |
Link to this message
|
|
That article is really old. It seems like I read it ages ago.
|
|
vzero
Junior Member
|
3. April 2006 @ 15:53 |
Link to this message
|
|
Couple of months, but it still holds true and is a good reflection of what some developers have found with the PS3. It is a little wibbly in places, but gets the basic idea right, and is a good read for those who don't have access to people actually using the dev machines (unlike myself) - it does underplay the difficulty of Cell somewhat, but only so that they don't get a ticking off from Sony... The conclusion is fair and the document is far from one-sided.
|
|
TruthMan
Member
|
10. April 2006 @ 05:49 |
Link to this message
|
|
this article is a good example of the increasing tech changes. just look when we started, i was referring to cards like X1800XT etc. nar weve got X1900XTX and some sweet stuff.... lol
Don't judge the consoles by specs, more isnt always better, espec in PS3 specs.i know the truth, ask if u wanna know.......
Do not compete without valid correct technicality on your terms of the argument.
|
|
az4164
Newbie
|
11. April 2006 @ 23:11 |
Link to this message
|
Xenos has 48 Unified Shaders (Pixel or Vertex) while RSX has 24 separate Pixel Shaders and 8 separate Vertex Shaders.
Xenos has nothing in common with ATI's R5xx and is the basis for ATI's R6xx. Xenos' feature set is way past DirectX9 and closer to DirectX10/WGF2.0
http://www.beyond3d.com/#news28611
While RSX is based on G70, a strict DirectX9 part
http://www.beyond3d.com/#news29579
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 11. April 2006 @ 23:35
|
|
vzero
Junior Member
|
12. April 2006 @ 12:48 |
Link to this message
|
|
Xenos is closer, in actual fact, to DX9 - it is a composite of DX9 with some DX10 shader techniques and intelligent integration technology (simplified shader implementation). It is better known as the R500, and was originally to be launched on the PC instead of the 360... It was replaced by the R520 which is a differant part, made by a superior design team. R600 will have more in common with the R520/580 than the R500...
The Xenos uses 48 ALUs and can output to a limited 16 ROPs, which is fine. It is an inferior part to the x1900 in ters of technology and architechture, which should be expected of a part designed nearly a year ahead of the other...
The G70 uses a pipeline design that is more efficient at filling the screen with textures, but inferior when heavy shader operations are needed. This is because of the 24 pipelines with a shader unit each, which can paint more pixels, but do less shader passes...
Neither has a big advantage over the other, but if Cell can be used well later in the game then we may see better things from PS3, and with the purported price tags I would bloody well hope so!
|
|
KoOkOo67
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
11. May 2006 @ 13:38 |
Link to this message
|
|
hmm and i was expection my thread to boost in posts at e3 time lol
>_<
|
|
matt5112
Junior Member
|
11. May 2006 @ 14:06 |
Link to this message
|
|
it seems that the cell is being multitaksed. for example some SPEs would handle phyics and some others would handle AI, volumetric calculations and so on.. at a detail level that would require a top of the line computer witha dedicated physics card
Giga-byte K8NXP-SLI
A64 3000 OC 1.8 to 1.98 ghz
2x512meg Dual Channel
MSI 6800 GT OC to 420 mhz, 1.10 ghz
Creative X-FI Extreme Music
Creative Inspire T7700 7.1
PSP 2.0 (For GTA:LCS)
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 11. May 2006 @ 14:07
|
|
vzero
Junior Member
|
11. May 2006 @ 14:27 |
Link to this message
|
|
Perhaps, but new bottlenecks revealed in the memory subsystems mean that graphics will suffer compared to today's high tech PCs...
|
|
matt5112
Junior Member
|
11. May 2006 @ 14:41 |
Link to this message
|
|
also the yeild has been rumoured to be under 70%
Giga-byte K8NXP-SLI
A64 3000 OC 1.8 to 1.98 ghz
2x512meg Dual Channel
MSI 6800 GT OC to 420 mhz, 1.10 ghz
Creative X-FI Extreme Music
Creative Inspire T7700 7.1
PSP 2.0 (For GTA:LCS)
|
|
eXistenZ1
Suspended permanently
|
6. June 2006 @ 04:45 |
Link to this message
|
|
What difference does it make anyway?
You pays your money......
You makes your choice.....
|
|
GMScribe
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
7. August 2006 @ 08:18 |
Link to this message
|
|
Firstly, the 360 doesn't have 48 shader pipes, it has 48 shaders, and 3 pipelines. Meaning you can adjust shader/vertex performance 16 shaders at a time. ie. 32 pixel 16 vertex. In average pixel shading, the 360 GPU performs more like a 24pipe R420, but leaving room for massieve vertex/geometry processing (needed for dx10).
As for the ps3, nVidia pipes are MUCH more robust AND have more texture fetch units.
Also, that big turbocache to the XDR memory is there for a reason, the CELL can handle many of the vertex ops. Giving it either incredible vertex power, a big thing for dx10 specs. Or (a big rumour) leaving room for more pixel shaders by having no vertex shaders on the GPU (this would not have to affect the architecture, just more of the same stuff).
A note on the 360 CPU, it can do 6 threads, though most games in first gen ps3 and 360 will only use the traditional 1 thread, so for the first year or so, potential will not be fully realised on the 360 cpu, however, having only one general purpose unit on the CELL, this isn't so much of a difference.
However the performance is limited on 360 CPU in hidden ways. Firstly, the fact that the 360 only has a 9GB storage. To fit more content in games, textures are compressed. This generally requires one of the 6 threads dedicated to realtime decoding, leaving only 5. Also, the 360 doesnt have an nForce DD5.1 encoding chip. So one thread must be dedicated to that for most games. Leaving 4 threads in a fully functional game.
For the ps3, the two above tasks can be fully offloaded onto the SPEs, though really a ps3 doesn't need texture decompression. Also, as compilers for the CELL improve, there is less ill effect on the cpu due to lack of branching on the SPEs. New physics techniques are being coded that work just as fast without branch prediciton, making the SPEs fully usefull for physics, and some aspects of AI. Leaving the general cpu with much less load (general operations make up a small ammount of modern programs), giving the ps3 most of the general branch power it needs.
|
|
GMScribe
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
7. August 2006 @ 08:23 |
Link to this message
|
Correction, it could be 16 pipes (i forget how the 360 GPU is compared to normal ATI GPUs). But the rest of the informatinn stands.
Also to note, while the 360 GPU can do free aa at x2 and x4, at 1080p resolutions, i believe it is limited to x2? Also i think trying to do supersample aa in the 10mb cache doesn't work very well either, though i can't be sure.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
Senior Member
|
7. August 2006 @ 08:27 |
Link to this message
|
|
Request for a closure.
Why was this thread brought back after no one posted since may 11th?
No offence guys but this will only make neph's life harder and result in another "which is better 360 or ps3" thread.We have discussed the specs in depth a zillion times.Get what you want based on facts.
The end.
|
